Volume 6, Issue 1, January – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
Analytic Study on Diagrid Structure
Abhishek Yadav1, Dr.Vikram A Patil2, Somanagouda R Takkalaki3
1
PG Student, Dept. of Civil Engineering, B. R. Harne College of Engineering and Technology, Mumbai, India
2
Project guide and Principal, B. R. Harne College of Engineering and Technology, Mumbai, India
3
Assistant Professor Dept. of Civil Engineering, B. R. Harne College of Engineering and Technology, Mumbai, India
Abstract:- As you can see in growing population
countries were demand of high rise building is
drastically increasing, due to which different types of
structural frame system have to look for economically,
structural stability and aesthetically aspects. These
different structural system such as conventional, braced
tube, outrigger, diagrid are most commonly used for
high rise buildings, among them Diagrid System are new
trends for high rise buildings due to its Structural and
aesthetical properties. Diagrid systems consists of
diagonal columns instead of vertical columns (Vertical
columns are deleted in this frame system). Diagrid
systems are diagonally connected due to which there is
reduction in lateral loads and some portion of gravity
load also as compared to other structural system.
Diagrid used in different angels depends upon the height
of the structure which is useful in reducing the forces. In
early days architectural view of the high rise buildings
are very important, due to the different angels of diagrid
with respect to height the combination gives better
architectural view than the Conventional and braced
system. At the start of the construction of high rise
building only conventional frame system is used for
construction later braced tube or braced frame system is
adopted in which both vertical column as well as diagrid
members are used for construction later and recently
Diagrid frame system were highly used it is some were
similar to braced tube system, only the vertical columns
are deleted. So in this thesis I am studying why diagrid
frame system are more adopted nowadays instead of
other structural system such as Conventional frame and
braced frame system. A rectangular plan of size 15 m ×
18 m and 20 story consist of 3m floor to floor of RCC
building is considered for analysis with same parameter
and same loadings for all buildings. The software used
for analysis and various data collections of all building
for comparison is Staad Pro. IS 456:2000 are used for
designing of all structural members and load
combinations of seismic forces are considered as per IS
1893(Part 1): 2002. After analysis of all the buildings
with same data the comparison is done by comparing the
beam forces, column forces, lateral displacement, story
drift, reinforcement in column, beam and footings etc.
Most of the lateral load are resist by external diagonal
columns at periphery of the building which gives less
effect of lateral loading to the internal column. This
causes reduction in the forces and reinforcement in
diagrid building as compared to conventional & braced
structure. As also there is less effect of lateral loading
there is less displacement and story drift in diagrid
building as compared to other buildings.
IJISRT21JAN678 www.ijisrt.com
I. INTRODUCTION
In a construction of high rise buildings lots of frame
system have been used such as shear wall, conventional
frame, brace tube system, diagrid system. But most efficient
and recently used system is diagrid. Diagrid consist of
diagonals with grids it is framework of diagonally
intersecting beams consist of Concrete, Steel or wooden.
Diagrid consist of diagonal column instead of vertical
column in the periphery of structure. All vertical columns
are eliminated on the exterior portion of the structure. In
recent days it is observed that diagrid frame system on the
periphery of the high rise building is commonly used as
compared to other frame buildings such as convention and
braced tube system. As diagrid frame structure is more
popular than other due to its structural performance and
aesthetically shape for construction of high rise buildings.
The diagrid frame structure resist more lateral loadings due
to wind and earthquake (this are the main forces which acts
as an important role in designing of high rise buildings) than
any other frame structure. Diagid is similar to or you can say
evolution of braced tube system. The only difference is that
the vertical column in the exterior are eliminated in diagrid
frame structure. The diagonal members act both inclined
column as well as bracing elements due to which they form
triangulated configuration. The shear forces and the bending
moment developed due to which the vertical columns bends
in most cases are resisted by axial action of these diagonal
members. Due to lesser no’s of obstruction at the exterior
portion of the diagrid buildings gives better outer view and
also the appearance of building from outside.
II. OBJECTIVES
The main objective of this thesis is to investigate why
diagrid structural system is adopted more than the other
structural system such as Conventional frame and Braced
frame system for that I am analyzing the different structural
system with same parameters under different seismic and
dynamic loadings. The work is to be carried out by
conducting-
(a) Study behavior of all buildings in various seismic zone
such as III, IV, V.
(b) Comparative study on behavior of both buildings in
various soil types.
(c) Comparative results of conventional, braced frame
building and diagrid building.
(d) Study on behavior of all buildings with uniform and
varying column sizes at different levels.
1517
Volume 6, Issue 1, January – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
III. SCOPE Table. 1- Properties of Different Materials involve in the
study.
The future demand in construction of high rise Properties of Materials Values
building is common so for the different structural system is
experimented therefore adoption of Diagrid system is Density of RCC 25 Kn/ m3
needful in terms of increasing the efficiency of work and
Density of Brick Masonry 20 Kn/m3
also cost reduction. To meet these requirements, the
structure should have adequate lateral strength & sufficient Young’s modulus , EC 27386 N/mm2
ductility. The unique compositional characteristic of the
structure provides great structural efficiency for tall Poisson ratio, μ 0.17
buildings. One can maximize the structural efficiency of the Compressive strength, of conc Fck 30 N/mm2
diagrid structure by optimizing its grid geometries. There
Grade of Steel Fe 500
are several factors that need to be considered in the design
of the diagrid system such as the number of stories of the
tall buildings, the optimum angle of the diagrid structures,
the material and size used in constructing the diagrid, beam Loading conditions
and column elements, the size of the columns and the Following loading are considered for analysis -
method employed to join the diagrid members. Structural (a) Dead Loads:
design of high rise building is governed by lateral loads due Self-wt of slab considering 150mm depth of slab = 3.75
to wind or earthquake. Lateral load resistance of structure is kN/m2
provided by interior or exterior structural system. Generally Floor Finishing load = 0.75 kN/m2
shear wall core or braced frame and their combination with Masonry Wall Load for inner wall = 9 kN/m
frames are the interior system, where lateral load is resisted Masonry Wall Load for parapet wall = 3 kN/m
by centrally located elements. Usually in conventional & (b) Live Loads:
braced frame, vertical columns are closely spaced while in Live Load on typical floors = 3 kN/m2
diagrid structure consists of incline columns on the exterior Live Load on roof = 2 kN/m2
surface of building. These inclined columns resist the lateral (c) Earth Quake Loads:
loads by axial action of the diagonal compared to bending of
vertical columns in conventional & braced framed. All the building frames are analyzed for various
seismic zone and different soil type
IV. METHODOLOGY
The earth quake loads are derived as per IS:
In this thesis comparison of diagrid, conventional & 1893(2002)
braced building with uniform and varying column sizes
under seismic and wind forces is done. Here G+20, story Table. 2- Seismic parameter
buildings is taken and same static and dynamic load is Seismic parameters Data/ Data/ Data/
applied for its behavior and comparison. Value Value Value
Earth Quake Zone III IV V
The high rise buildings of different frame structure are Response Reduction 5 5 5
subjected to different vibrational forces due to earthquake Factor
and wind therefore seismic analysis and wind analysis is Importance Factor 1 1 1
essential for these building frames. The fixed base system is Damping 5% 5% 5%
analyzed by employing in building frames in different Soil Type Hard Medium Soft Soil
seismic zones in various soil types by means of Staad.Pro Soil Soil
software. The response of the building frames is studied for
useful interpretation of results V. RESULTS

Structural models Interior column analysis

Fig. 1. Plan of conventional & braced & diagrid building

Fig. 2. Interior column

IJISRT21JAN678 www.ijisrt.com 1518

Volume 6, Issue 1, January – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
60
70

Bending Moment in KN.m

Axial Force in KN

50
60
40 Diagrid Diagrid
Building 50 Buildin
30 g
Normal 40
20 Building Normal
30 Buildin
10 Braced g
20
Building Braced
0 10 Buildin
Storey 0 g
Fig. 3.Comparison of Shear Force Gr flr 1st 6th 14th 20th
Storey
60 Fig. 7.Comparison of Shear Force.
50
Bending Moment in KN-

40 Footing Column Analysis

Diagrid
30 Building
20 Normal
m

10 Building
0 Braced
Building

Storey
Fig. 4.Comparison of Bending Moment.

Beam Analysis
Fig. 8. Column footing location

Fig. 5. Beam location

70
60
Shear Force in KN

50 Diagrid
40 Building Fig. 9. Comparisons of Shear force.
30 Normal
Building
20
Braced
10
Building
0
Gr flr 1st 6th 14th 20th
Storey

Fig. 6.Comparison of Shear Force.

IJISRT21JAN678 www.ijisrt.com 1519

Volume 6, Issue 1, January – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
Material Comparison
Quantity of Conventional Diagrid Braced
Material Building Building Building

Volume of 1660 1115 1860

Concrete in
Cu.m
Weight of 1329 958 1358
Steel in kN

VI. CONCLUSION

1. There is a reduction in various lateral and gravity loads

parameters as compare to other frame structure which is
useful in high rise building where lateral loads govern
Fig. 10. Comparisons of Bending Moment. the design.
2. As diagrid frame structures does not have corner
Time period comparisons columns as compared to other structural frame system
(Conventional and Braced Frame System) due to which
there is a reduction in displacement of top storey and
6 also column less corners gives better view and
5 Braced aesthetically appearance.
3. Diagrid helps in sustainable development as amount of
Time period in sec

Building
4 construction material required is less and energy is saved
due to less obstruction to incoming light at the periphery
3 Diagrid of building.
Building 4. Material saving property: Although quantity of concrete
2 used in building’s is approx. Same, but diagrid shows
1 more economical in terms of steel used. Diagrid building
Conventio
saves about 28 to 30% steel without affecting the
nal
0 structural efficiency.
Building
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
REFERENCES
Mode
Fig. 11. Time period comparisons. [1]. “Strategies to Reduce Lateral Forces on High-rise
Buildings that Use Diagrid Structural System”, Binh
Lateral displacement K. Nguyen and Hasim Altan , School of Architecture,
40.00 The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United
Kingdom.
35.00 [2]. Khan, F.R. (1973). “Evolution of structural systems
CONVENTI
Lateral Displacements in mm

30.00 ONAL for high-rise buildings in steel and concrete”.

[3]. Popov, E.P. (1982). “Seismic framing systems for tall
25.00 BUILDING
buildings”. Engineering Journal/American Institute of
20.00 Steel Construction, 19(Third Quarter), 141-149.
15.00 DIAGRID [4]. “Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat” (1995).
BUILDING Structural Systems for Tall Buildings. McGraw-Hill:
10.00 New York.
5.00 [5]. AISC. (1998).” Manual of Steel Construction: Load
0.00 and Resistance Factor Design”. American Institute of
Steel Construction: Chicago, IL.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
[6]. Kareem, T. Kijewski and Y. Tamura (1999),
\ Floors “Mitigation of Motions of Tall Buildings with Specific
Fig. 12. Lateral displacement. Examples of Recent Applications”, Wind and
Structures, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 201-251.
[7]. Ali, M.M. (2001).” Art of the Skyscraper: The Genius
of Failure Khan”. New York: Rizzoli.

IJISRT21JAN678 www.ijisrt.com 1520

Volume 6, Issue 1, January – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
[8]. Kimura, Y., MacRae, G. A., and Roeder, C. (2002),
“Column Stiffness Effects on Braced Frame Seismic
Behaviour," Proceedings of the 7th U.S. National
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, EERI, Boston,
Paper No. 49.
[9]. Moon K.S. (2005), “Dynamic Interrelationship
between Technology and Architecture in Tall
Buildings", Ph.D. dissertation, Department of
Architecture, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
[10]. Taranath BS (2005), “Wind and earthquake resistant
buildings”, Marcel Dekker, New York.
[11]. Jantz, Dirk H (2005). “30 St. Mary Axe/Swiss Re
Headquarter”, London.” 14.04.
[12]. H. E. Ilgin and M. H. Gunel (2007), “The Role of
Aerodynamic Modifications in the Form of Tall
Buildings against Wind Excitation”, METU JFA
2007/2 (24:2), pp. 17-25.
[13]. R. J. Smith and M. R. Willford (2007), “The Damped
Outrigger Concept for Tall Building”, The Structural
Design of Tall and Special Buildings, Vol. 16, pp.
501-517.
[14]. Moon K.S (2008), “Material-Saving Design Strategies
for Tall Building Structures", CTBUH 8th World
Congress, Dubai, March 2008.
[15]. P. Irwin, J. Kilpatrick, J. Robinson and A. Frisque
(2008), “Wind and Tall Buildings: Negatives and
Positives”, The Structural Design of Tall and Special
Buildings, Vol. 17, (2008), pp. 915-928.
[16]. Moon, K. (2008), “Optimal Grid Geometry of Diagrid
Structures for Tall Buildings”. Architectural Science
Review, 51.3, pp. 239-251.
[17]. “Design and Construction of Steel Diagrid Structures”,
K. Moon, NSCC2009, School of Architecture, Yale
University, New Haven, USA.
[18]. Kim J., Jun Y. and Lee Y.H (2010), “Seismic
Performance Evaluation of Diagrid System
Buildings", 2nd Specialty Conference on Disaster
Mitigation, Manitoba.
[19]. Jani Khushbu (2012), “Analysis and Design of Diagrid
Structural System for High Rise Steel Buildings”, M.
Tech. Dissertation, Nirma University, Ahmadabad,
2012.
[20]. “Strategies to Reduce Lateral Forces on High-rise
Buildings that Use Diagrid Structural System”, Binh
K. Nguyen and Hasim Altan , School of Architecture,
The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United
Kingdom.
[21]. IS 456: 2000 Plain Reinforced concrete- Code of
Practice, Bureau of Indian Standard, New Delhi.
[22]. IS 1893(Part-I): 2002. Criteria for Earthquake
Resistant Design of Structures. Bureau of Indian
Standard, New Delhi.
[23]. Diagrid structures-Systems, Connections, Details by
Terri Meyer Boake.

IJISRT21JAN678 www.ijisrt.com 1521